Posted on 01/24/2008 5:30:01 AM PST by Zender500
I fully in the evolutionist camp, but Woods Hole is being an A Hole here. If his work were compromised by his beliefs then there would be a cause for firing but this is evidently not the case.
Some of the Darwinist Fundies have been listening to too much of their own propaganda and are now attacking any and all deviations from the gradualism doctrine that'd been abandoned nearly a century ago.
So now we arrive at thought control. No other thought will be tolerated. There will be no discussion, no alternate theory, you will accept the theory as fact. The closing of the academic mind.
I fail to see how a belief in an alternative HISTORY of the world can have ANY impact on the organization's STATED MISSION, unless that mission is to invalidate the belief system of Christians. Which would hardly be a scientific position.
If he refuses to believe in observable scientific phenomena, then I could understand him being terminated. But even if evolution was entirely true, it is equally possible that God created the universe 10,000 years ago in exactly the state that it would be in had it evolved for billions of years. It's not scientific, but it IS unprovable, and belief in it does not compromise current scientific endeavor.
If this was a private group, I think they would have a right to discriminate, just because private groups can do stupid things. But if they get government money (MY MONEY) then they need to be answerable to me, through government regulation passed by my representatives.
I think the problem has nothing to do with his beliefs at all, but rather those of his employer. Until his supervisor learned of his beliefs, there was no question whether he was doing good work. When people can be fired for doing good work, something is wrong (although I’m not so sure the anti-discrimination law is the best remedy).
(Before reading any comments)
How long before Darwin’s Dupes turn up to deny, gloat, and/or blameshift?
If this is an accurate account, Woods Hole is in the wrong.
I can envision the same thing happening to global warming ‘deniers.’
Please read reply #3.
Sincerely,
Darwin Dupe
Evolution is to me obviously true.
It also is pretty obvious that Woods Hole is being bigoted and irrational in this case. Furthermore, their attitude is antagonistic to the spirit of free, imaginative thinking which is necessary in science, as it is in many other areas of human affairs.
It is a shame that such as case ever arose, and that it now must be adjudicated in our clumsy, inefficient, wasteful, and uncertain legal system. As I tell youngsters, “If you simply do what is right in the first place, you will avoid most of life’s problems.”
No doubt a whole host of laws come along with that money.
You got to get your mind right or the walking boss will beat you senseless.
You are a refreshing exception to what I think you’d admit is the rule, and I’m happy to be wrong in expecting otherwise.
I’m firmly for evolution also and this case just stinks.
Abraham’s beliefs did not conflict with his work...even his statement’s don’t necessary conflict with evolutionary thinking. It’s well known that the eye evolved independently several times, I’m sure the same is true with the heart.
If this is an accurate depiction of events, then Woods Hole needs to pay damages and dump Hahn.
I have met persons such as Hahn and they are as reviling as Nifong in North Carolina.
There seems to be a hate streak among the Hahn types for people that profess their belief in God. It is irrational and outrageous. Time for a little payback. Hahn needs to be made an example of.
Oh, the irony — liberals love “survival of the fittest” which is completely at odds with their social and economic policies which reward the weak and punish the fit.
People who believe in the bible, there is no place for you here. Pick up your stuff and get out. Thank you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.